"Police can suspend your rights"

[65fastback2+2]

Should the police officer then turn up a firearm or other weapon in the car, the driver "would be guilty or potentially guilty of even a more severe offense" than whatever he had allegedly done to precipitate the traffic stop, according to Mayor Glover. Police officers, according to Glover, are invested with "a power that the President of the United States does not have ... and that is the ability to be able to suspend your rights."

http://www.lewrockwell.com/grigg/grigg-w99.1.html

its sinking quick

[oxfordmach]

what happened to innocent till proven guilty and the second amendment!

[Thunderbolt]

Originally Posted by oxfordmach

what happened to innocent till proven guilty and the second amendment!

One more word out of you sir and I'll take away your right to speak. (gets duct tape out of trunk)

[Mach351]

my $.02

if LEO performs traffic stop for anything such as failure to use turn signal (or rolling through stop sign or whatever), they have probable cause to do anything else they want. ie search your vehicle, drunk test etc.
probable cause vs suspension of rights could just be semantics

CHL or not, if you know the law enough to know you can carry a concealed weapon in your vehicle you better know the law enough to know LEO can seize it from you if either you say you have a weapon and turn it over to them (which usually they will give it back to you after the stop if you are not a ****) or decide to search the vehicle and find one (in this case your probably in deep doodoo).

and the president can suspend any persons rights without cause. it's in written in the Patriot Act.
LEO needs probable cause.

[acreature]

Originally Posted by Mach351

my $.02

if LEO performs traffic stop for anything such as failure to use turn signal (or rolling through stop sign or whatever), they have probable cause to do anything else they want. ie search your vehicle, drunk test etc.

Officers stopping a car only need a Reasonable Suspicion. To ARREST or SEARCH they need Probable Cause.

Just because you are stopped by LE, does not mean you lose any rights. You only temporarily lose the privilege to drive at that moment.

[un gm]

^ correct

[281mustang]

Originally Posted by Mach351

my $.02

if LEO performs traffic stop for anything such as failure to use turn signal (or rolling through stop sign or whatever), they have probable cause to do anything else they want. ie search your vehicle, drunk test etc.
probable cause vs suspension of rights could just be semantics

Traffic stops gives LEOs probable cause to search a vechile...? lol. LEOs can indeed pull you over for technicalities(going 46 in a 45, not coming to a COMPLETE stop at a stop sign, etc.) but that is where it ends.

Do some research on case studies in regards to the fourth amendment. "Probable cause" is an extreme gray area as it was intended to cover an endless amount of possibilities but there are still only four ways a cop can search your car:

Giving an LEO consent to seach your vechile or leaving your car door open when exiting your vechile(as it is considered to "imply" consent.) The majority of Americans are unaware of their 4th amendment and will surrounder it when intimidated by the police.

An LEO ordering a K9 to sniff your car that results in a positive "hit."

Having something illegal in plain sight when the officer approachs your window.

The large grey area of the endless other possibilities, but jurys generally want to see some pretty conclusive evidence before granting an unconsented search constitutional.

It's very common for an LEO to stop a car for a traffic stop, search a vechile based on a "hunch", find illegal items and/or drugs, and then have the entire case completely thrown out. It really doesn't matter what they find. There are plenty of people that have been busted trafficing entire cars worth of cocaine, heroin, etc. and were looking at a couple decades of prision yet got off completely scott free because the LEO didn't have any rational other than "he looked very suspicious."

[acreature]

The Mayor, is an idiot for being quoted as saying such stupid, uneducated, ignorant statements.

The "blog" is one-sided, and paints a picture based on a few encounters out of thousands to tens of thousands.